[TEX] Wrap KVS service reads and track bytes read (no metrics)

[ergo14]

General

Before this PR:
Splitting #6340 into two and this is part 1.
The referenced PR was tested in a test environment
After this PR:

==COMMIT_MSG==
==COMMIT_MSG==

Priority:
P2
Concerns / possible downsides (what feedback would you like?):
Any concerns should have been addressed in upstream TEX PRs (#6332, #6334, #6336, #6337, #6361)
We also might not want to risk this given prioritization
Is documentation needed?:
N/A

Compatibility

Does this PR create any API breaks (e.g. at the Java or HTTP layers) - if so, do we have compatibility?:
Yes, moved ExpectationsAwareTransaction out of the API. No one should really be using this (confirmed).
Does this PR change the persisted format of any data - if so, do we have forward and backward compatibility?:
No
The code in this PR may be part of a blue-green deploy. Can upgrades from previous versions safely coexist? (Consider restarts of blue or green nodes.):
Yes
Does this PR rely on statements being true about other products at a deployment - if so, do we have correct product dependencies on these products (or other ways of verifying that these statements are true)?:
No
Does this PR need a schema migration?
No

Testing and Correctness

What, if any, assumptions are made about the current state of the world? If they change over time, how will we find out?:
N/A
What was existing testing like? What have you done to improve it?:
N/A
If this PR contains complex concurrent or asynchronous code, is it correct? The onus is on the PR writer to demonstrate this.:
N/A
If this PR involves acquiring locks or other shared resources, how do we ensure that these are always released?:
N/A

Execution

How would I tell this PR works in production? (Metrics, logs, etc.):
Nothing changes
Has the safety of all log arguments been decided correctly?:
Yes
Will this change significantly affect our spending on metrics or logs?:
No
How would I tell that this PR does not work in production? (monitors, etc.):
We see failed reads to the KVS
If this PR does not work as expected, how do I fix that state? Would rollback be straightforward?:
Recall and rollback
If the above plan is more complex than “recall and rollback”, please tag the support PoC here (if it is the end of the week, tag both the current and next PoC):
@mdaudali

Scale

Would this PR be expected to pose a risk at scale? Think of the shopping product at our largest stack.:
No
Would this PR be expected to perform a large number of database calls, and/or expensive database calls (e.g., row range scans, concurrent CAS)?:
No
Would this PR ever, with time and scale, become the wrong thing to do - and if so, how would we know that we need to do something differently?:
No

Development Process

Where should we start reviewing?:
Anywhere
If this PR is in excess of 500 lines excluding versions lock-files, why does it not make sense to split it?:

Please tag any other people who should be aware of this PR:
@jeremyk-91
@mdaudali
@Sam-Kramer
@sverma30

[changelog-app]

Generate changelog in changelog/@unreleased

Type

• Feature
• Improvement
• Fix
• Break
• Deprecation
• Manual task
• Migration

Description

[TEX] Wrap KVS service reads and track bytes read (no metrics)

Check the box to generate changelog(s)

• Generate changelog entry

[mdaudali]

Same as https://github.com/palantir/atlasdb/pull/6340/files which we've approved, without the bits that we are waiting on tests for, and is a no-op for actually reporting the metrics

[svc-autorelease]

Released 0.820.0